Teen grid observations...

Well, not that I was necessarily refering to you, but you actually did:





Unless you are referring to non linden lab people. In which case, amen brother .. but good luck with that.

You did not quote my entire statement - I was referring to the post I quoted, so yes, taken out of context, you could say I was referring to anyone. Congrats.

I was correlating because it was a tad vague:



However, I do realise that you may have tried to target the non Linden Lab responses. In which case, I can only agree with you and agree that everyone should stop being rude about everything (not just this issue).

So, as Chris stated, there seem to be 3 major issues:

1. pornography/adult content
   
2. child predators
   
3. money
   

Pornography could be handled by reviewing submissions in a similar fashion to 'There'. From the very get-go, this would increase the workload on LL substantially. There would need to be a Linden employee (or two, three, four.. who knows) that would have to view and approve/decline the submission. I'm fine with this, as it is the most realistic approach to keeping questionable content out of that grid. The end result of having a submissions system is that it increases LL's staffing needs.

The other part of the porn/adult content is in-world creations. How do you stop a teen from creating v2.0 of the Extreme Penis? Unless you setup another content-submission process (requiring more man-hours from LL), you can't. To really lock it down, you'd have to create an offline building app, allow them to then upload the creation for approval.

The child predator issue is probably the most difficult one of all. There is no good way to ensure that an adult cannot enter Teen SL. There's no way to stop them from lying and saying this account is for thier child. The only solution I can see is for the parents to make sure thier kids know the dangers, and know them well. Of course, this sort of education should be standard fare for parenting anyway.

Money... hmm.. well, I'm really not sure what the issue was, so I'll skip this one.

I read your entire statement and quoted the bit that I felt needed to be addressed. Just as you have done with my quote.

You referred ll as a "common carrier" I am very not as familiar with that term. I would prefer case law as it applies here. In your reference to this "common carrier"

As I have suggested before I think the wisest course of action would be not allowing any uploads. The one obvious advantage is that all goods would have to be bought from the main grid via the transfer island process that Robin spoke of. Meaning they would have to purchase from av's in the main grid. Supply and demand and market trends tell me that many would profit from such an honorable choice.

Juro I have offered 2 clear suggestions.

Manpower hours; it is easier to go threw everything at once than to be constantly reivewing abuse reports or trying to find obsene material that must be delieted from the kiddie grid. There for the ll workload would be less via this method.

Linden Lab is actively targeting kids as their demographic. This is not a case of kids happening to use an adult product. Since they're targeting kids, to get that money, they have a responsibility to make sure it's secure for them.

You don't actively try to draw in kids and then say, "Oh, well, we'll try to make it safe for them, but no promises." When you deliberately focus on that age-group, it does come with responsibility.

Bad, naughty sycophant! You got ad hominem all over the carpet. *swats Lordfly with a newspaper*

This point was not directed at you.


Look! It's a strawman.


Therefore, none of my concerns have validity?


Handwaving, sputtering mockery, handwaving...


This is a false analogy, which unnecessarily draws away from the points I made which specifically address the technological differences between chat and SL.


I didn't say the Lindens are doing nothing. I never said anything about anarchy.


Which has nothing at all to do with what I said.


Of course I have. Is this really the corner you want to be in during this discussion? You just implied that your view is that this game should be played with parents looking over their teenager's shoulders at all times due to the possibility that technology of the game allows sexual content to be distributed among minors with or without their consent.

However, this brings out the matter of the ESRB rating system, specifically designed to let parents know if viewer discretion is, in fact, advised.

TEEN - Titles rated T - Teen have content that may be suitable for persons ages 13 and older. May contain violent content, mild or strong language, and/or suggestive themes.

MATURE - Titles rated M - Mature have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain mature sexual themes, more intense violence and/or strong language.

Until these technological issues are resolved, such that image transfers and uploads of mature materials are not possible without actually hacking the game's code with a mod, then the rating will have to be Mature.

I would be fine with that.

Of course, that would eliminate the whole premise of this being a teen SL.


Very unimpressive false dichotomy. If I don't do as your parents did, then I must resort to... "rallying against the humor-filled clowns"...? What does that mean, anyway? Never mind.


This is happily not my problem, since I'm not targeting minors with a product that allows free distribution of pornographic materials using the existing technology without modifications. If LL can't answer this question of scalability, then the premise should, in my opinion, be rethought more carefully.


This has all been worked out under federal law. I believe another poster thoughtfully provided a sample of such.


Funny thing how you don't actually know how many parents are clueless though, do you?

Privacy, as it pertains to children and their parents is between that child and parent.

Your last comment isn't worthy of riposte.


This is an excellent point. I do not know enough about software programming to propose a way around that. However, if every time I check my kid's chat log, nothing was there, I think I'd catch on.


See above.


Then maybe... just perhaps... this is a bad idea from the start. Mm?


Excellent point. Hence, the idea of monitoring materials, better verification of account ownership, and chat logging. If you're telling me that the technology does not exist to do this, or that it is infeasible while still maintaining a profit, but LL should do it anyway, I cease to see how one could call that responsible business practice. Much less that this is all about "educational purposes".

Rather, it seems to me that this is primarily about money. That's fine. I'd prefer if Linden would just be honest about that. They are a business. I don't expect them to be suddenly charitable. What I'm seeing here, however, is a gross absconding of responsibility, while covering it with the blanket of "educating" the children, when in fact this is about grabbing a new market niche.


Do you have any?


You're justifying your position (I totally don't understand your motivations for making this your position when this is actually about LL and their business practices, but be that as it may...).. by comparing other different technologies and their practices with SL, making an assumption about my child and then making another assumption about SL.

Not exactly the most solid ground to argue from, but nonetheless...


This is entirely irrelevant to the points that I made earlier. I know you're trying to be insulting and condescending, but it really isn't necessary, you realize. I wasn't talking about chat. I did not deny that LL is creating a form of supervision. I asked specifically how they are going to control content that is uploaded, and how they will verify account ownership beyond the honor system and reactionary discipline.

In case you don't understand why, I asked this question because reactionary discipline only addresses the problems after the damage has been done, when options exist to prevent a larger portion of the damage. The honor system relies on the judgment of minors in matters of adult material.


See above.


Hmm. Well, I do.

The rest of this post is repetitive.

Yours,

M.

When in doubt, dissect a perfectly good post with "logical fallacies". It's usually a nice way of dodging an issue that, usually, doesn't need, require, or even brush the concept of logic.

But nevermind that, let's get to the meat and potatoes of these shenanigans.



Just because it's not directed at me doesn't mean I can't disapprove of it. Why don't you stop demanding everyone be a modern day Poet Laureate and accept the fact that not everyone is 100% comfortable with a chat medium?



No, it's a valid question. What more do you want from LLabs to protect your innocent, wide-eyed, bushy-tailed little childroons? Cages around their avatars to protect them from naughty hands? 300-meter personal bubble spaces around every avatar? G-rated log filtering?



Not really, seeing as you're so intent on dismissing everyone else's arguments as logical fallacies.



Handwaving, logical dissections and conclusions that have little bearing with the topic at hand, handwaving...



Let's pretend I'm stupid (I'm sure you're doing that as I type this.) If you sat me in front of SL, and then a regular chat room, I would conclude that Second Life is a chat room with graphics.

That's about the extent of the technological differences when you get down to brass tacks. Any weaknesses a chat room has, Second Life has. That includes weaknesses to attack, exploitation, impersonation, peer pressure, and social outcasting.

Likewise, any strrong points a chat room has, SL has. That includes collaboration, increased social awareness, cultural exchange, and peer influence.



So if you acknowledge the fact that the Lindens are doing something about these ill-conceived notions about armies of pedophiles rampaging across the grid, why the postings?



Pot to kettle, pot to kettle, come in kettle, you are black, over.

If you're going to complain about that, don't dissect a post like you're taking an exam in "Logic 101".



Incorrect. Thanks for reading, though.

My point was that if you were so concerned as to your children being exposed to naughty bits, cuss words, wanton violence, and bad old men, then I suggested sitting down with them and, you know, SUPERVISING. That's what parents do, after all, and if they don't want to take the risk of their kids being exposed to such things, then they shouldn't rely on others to do their work for them.

I absolutely deplore the concept of any sort of mega-nanny state that concerned parents are wanting to dictate to LLabs. One Liason for every child! Block all uploaded content! Reverse credit card background checks and GPS satellite monitoring of every person on the grid!

Please. If you don't want your kid to see naughty bits, get off the internet right now. Period.

And don't reply saying "OMFG I NEVER SAID THAT!!!!oneone111", because I know you didn't. I'm taking your concerns and extrapolating them to a grim future where parents refuse to take responsibility for their offspring's actions or protection. I usually do it to get a point across. Logical Ad Hominem Pro Quo Pluribus, and all that.



Uh huh. And you know what? Those ESRB notices also come with another notice whenever you connect to an online portion of a game: "Warning: ESRB content rating may change during online play". Know what that means? Any sort of rating system goes out the window.

The Sims Online is rated T for Teen, for "Comic Mischief,Mature Sexual Themes,Mild Violence". Of course, once you connect to the online servers, the ESRB rating does not apply. At all. You get wanton violence, extreme sexual contact, and enough "comic mischief" to bring a clown to his knees.

Medal of Honor is rated T for Teen, for "violence". Once you go to an online server, however, it immediately probably goes up to M+++, because you hear every dirty word in the book in the span of about 30 seconds.

An ESRB rating system is fine, for offline play. But not for online play. It just doesn't work.



Nevermind the fact that creative texturing is what makes SL INTERESTING...

...that wouldn't block ANY mature content from coming to the game. None.

Does it take a mature image to make a prosthetic penis? Stripper pole? Prostitution ring? How about a cyber escort service? Erotic chat? Sexual poetry?

The answers, in case you were wondering, is a resounding no.



I wouldn't. It would suck the creativity out of tons of kids if all they had to play with were the default, ugly textures that EVERYONE ELSE HAD TO USE. Sims Online, anyone?



So why suggest it?




If you don't do as my parents did, then your child should not be online. Period.



Wow. Does it say anywhere in the dockets for Teen SL that you can get free porn?

This is ridiculous. Any number of places online can feasibly "allow free distribution of pornographic materials using the existing technology without modification", many where teens go (I present to you, again, Yahoo, AIM, MSN, ICQ, all aimed at the teenage demographic quite prominently, and also all quite able to display porn on an infinite basis)

Does a car manufacturer have to print on its sales fliers that "Car may possibly be used for homicide, drunken driving, bank robberies, and general nogoodniks?"

No one can answer that question of scalibility, unitl you find a self-adaptive AI system.



Really? Custom sex SL animations are declared under federal law? Boy, those US congressmen are pretty quick lately!

Federal law gets into grey areas all the time with virtual spaces. This is no different.



Why? Do you? Does anyone? Oh, wait no. AD HOMINEM STRAWMAN QUID PRO QUO PLURIBUS UNUM!

Where I work we get a fair amount of parents happily describing buying an M+ rated game for their 7 year old kids, as they purchase another one, and as I describe to them that it's probably not appropriate for kids that age, they shrug their shoulders. That's pretty freaking clueless to me.

Also, most of my friends growing up had restrictive parents that tried to limit their online exposure with Net Nanny and the like. Using various means and methods, my friends disabled that software without the parents ever catching on. Ever. Again, pretty freaking clueless.

Most folks are clueless about their surroundings, online and offline. It's how the human species functions.



Yes, so why are you suggesting that LLabs get in the way of that?



Why not? You've dissected every other sentence of mine. Might as well go for the gusto.



If, every time I checked my kid's internet history logs, and didn't see any funny business, I think I'd catch on.

Except when they edit out the naughty bits by hand, or simply respond "well, Dad, I have to clean the cache out every day, otherwise we get spyware!" or "Well, Dad, I have to make space for this computer, it's getting pretty full".

There are a dozen ways for tech-savvy kids to daze and confuse their less technologically-inclined parents.



*looks up, sees sky not falling, continues typing*




Maybe the internet was a bad idea too. Let's ban it so we don't have to worry about the Bad Things from scaring our children in our sleep!

Nevermind the rich cultural, creative, and social outlets a new technology will bring! Nevermind that kids would be developing skills for the real world by playing around in a virtual sandbox! Nevermind that they will meet like-minded teens from around the world, happily building a creative, bright, and vibrant future!

DOWN WITH NEW TECHNOLOGY! WE MUST SAVE THE CHILDREN FROM THEMSELVES AND THE DEMONS THAT INFEST THIS "INTARWEB!!!!"




monitoring materials and chat logging: LLabs does this on the current grid now. They can pull up almost any conversation said in the last couple of days, PMs or not.

Account ownership: Again, how do you fix this? "Dear Sir or Madam, do you have a child using Teen Life? Signed, LLabs."

Linden Lab is a for-profit firm. But they're a good for-profit firm. They are not money-grubbing capitalist industrialists. They have kids too. They're not trying to suck your kid's soul away, either. Give them a break, huh?



Limited hours availibilty (to provide better liason monitoring, to protect your kids)
All chats/IMs logged for abuse reports (to protect your kids)
Liasons on duty while the grid is up (100% coverage, to protect your kids)
Open, easily approachable, friendly folks working behind the server racks (ever call up Linden Lab? Almost anyone that you get on the line is friendly to a fault... not bad when your primary business is customer support)

Those above 4 things offer more protection and monitoring for your child than any other virtual space used by teens on the Internet today. If you don't believe your kid is safe in this environment, again, I implore you to disconnect the cable modem right now.



Do you have any experience running a multi-faceted, multimedia user interface environment for teens?

If I can't give advice to parents as to how to protect their kids, then YOU can't give advice to Linden Lab as to how to run their business venture.



Second Life is based upon previous technologies, from a chat medium all the way up to streaming technology.

I am simply assuming your child is a smart cookie, able to deflect and disable any sort of monitoring device you could throw at him. Do you assume otherwise?

I make assumptinos about the technological ramifications about SL because I've been using the software for over a year and half, every day. That would give me some "experience" in judging how a new foray into the uncharted waters of childroons would fare with LLabs technology. I think that's a pretty solid ground to base accusations and statements on, eh?



Thanks for assuming that I'm trying to be insulting and condescending, and judging by your second paragraph, monumentally stupid as well. It really gels well with the rest of your arguments.

The Liasons control content that is uploaded after it is displayed inappropriately in the world. If a teen puts up a gigantic penis, a Liason will find it either by his/her own actions or by an offended resident.

You can go further than this by doing what another poster suggested: Offer a bounty to residents for turning in inappropriate content... $L50 per image turned in, or whatever. A self-policing community is a happy community. It also lowers the need for Liasons, as kids would be more than happy to turn annoying, griefing kids in for cash.

LF

True Stories
Law enforcement officials and families themselves suggest that not every online adventure is a pleasant one.
http://www.missingkids.com/adcouncil/stories.html

ll is catering to kids therefor it is their duty to make sure kids are safeguarded from the onset. To discount this subject is imbecilic at best. I have grave concerns about the purpose of anyone oppugnant, to the obvious propitious opinions of knowledgeable ppl in this tread.
ll continues to raise serious concerns, as they continue to turn a blind eye to the kiddie grid. Responsible parents do not put their children in a lions den and hope that those kids will not be harmed. I see ll opinion as "lets wait to dial 911 till this child is mauled by the tiger."
Unacceptable.

Really? Got any proof of that? Or are you just not listening to LLabs answers?

They're going to have Liasons. They're going to have an instant-help "911" type thing for kids in distress. They're going to have limited hours to keep kids monitored. They're going to monitor all chats.

What more do you want?

LF

The inability to upload content.
Proof?
With every post I have also provided various links to substantiate my views.

Martin, you want teens to NOT be able to upload content? None?

Tell me, Martin, have you ever built anything in SL? Any serious, large projects? Well, maybe not, you've only been in SL since november...

Just try making a decent store, house, lamp, WHATEVER, with only the textures LL provides when you sign up for an account. I think you'll find it rather difficult. As a note, this isnt to knock the Lindens, it's just that they trusted us to create our own textures for whatever we need them for.

Now, Martin, you completely ignored LF's points about not needing textures, animations, or sounds for mature content. What good will banning uploads do?







Also, Martin, ask yourself, would you still play SL if noone could upload any custom content?

Several months ago Linden Lab registered with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. We have spent time with their representative, and have a policy in place for dealing with child pornography. We've had one instance of a complaint, and worked with a local police force to make sure that it was taken care of (as it turned out it wasn't children who were in the image). Hopefully, we'll never have to call them again, but protecting children -- both those using SL and those we've never met who may have been exploited -- remains a primary concern.

Eat it!

well I certainly trust my 16 year old sister with the teen grid.I know shes responsible enough to do whats right.


and speaking from self experience making too strong of boundaries only makes a child too determined to go wild in the real world.

Why is everyone so scared of teens viewing a little sexual content?

Seriously...

I think they're more scared of what will happen when said teen's parents sue Linden Lab for letting their precious monster see it.

i agree i was exposed to everything as a teen.there was nothing u couldnt show or tell me that i hadnt already known or seen somewhere else other thn home.




why dont they just add a special little no sueing policy in the user agreement that way parents cant sue becuz they were forewarned about the games content.

Because it wouldn't work. That's like marking a take-away coffee cup with the words 'contents may be hot' and hoping that the moron who scalleds itself by spilling it while thinking it's ok to try to drink it while negotiating traffic won't sue you for not making it less stupid.

Your correct, I think it would be a mistake to allow them the means to upload pornography.

Any content they need can be purchased threw users in the adult grid, after it has been reviewed by ll.



I would not have a problem with it as long as someone provided some useable content.

That is good to know ty Robin.

IMO over protection stifles learning. We cant be expected to keep kids in a crib till they are adults. Hopefully they know right from wrong. Its all a process of learning. No parents are at their teens side every second of the day, nor do they know what is said or seen throughout the day. Trust is an important thing for both parents and teens to learn. LL is supplying a very well thought out plan for the Teen Grid.

Will it be abused? Of course it will, the 18+ grid is abused. Does LL have a process to quickly handle abuse? Yes, and I believe it will be double effective on the teen grid.

lordfly as I did not see a reply from you re: "common carrier"

I took the libery of looking up this information. As you see a common carrier is subject to federal law.

common carrier: In a telecommunications context, a telecommunications company that holds itself out to the public for hire to provide communications transmission services. Note: In the United States, such companies are usually subject to regulation by Federal and state regulatory commissions. Synonyms carrier, commercial carrier, communications common carrier.

It also makes them a fair bit immune to most civil suits regarding the content they deliver.

Let's use USENET as an example.

It's been around for 30 years. There are at least 40-50 pedophile "groups", with grossly identifiable names. They always have posts in them. Always. They are, without a doubt, illegal in all internet-ready nations.

These images are stored, cached, and delivered to every usenet server on the internet every day, all over the world.

This is, of course, on top of the millions of mp3s uploaded every day, the thousands of television shows, and the hundreds of movies uploaded every single day.

Oh, and if you want free games, USENET is THE place to get them, oftentimes months before the official "release" (Halo2 was posted 3 months before it was supposed to come out).

Why aren't the ISPs shut down for obviously harboring millions of gross copyright infringement and pedophilia images? Because they are "common carriers". They simply take 100% of all content that is given to them, regardless of subject, filesize, or whatever.

Were they to start picking and choosing what goes where and how, you would no longer be a common carrier. Big deal you say, at least all the illegal stuff would be removed.

Not really.

If you start moderating what comes into your server, you are suddenly immediately responsible for ALL the content on there. And if you think a couple guys at an ISP can identify 100% of all warez, porn, music, and movie uploads 100% of the time, 24/7/365, in 50,000+ newsgroups, you have to give me what you're smoking, because I bet it's a fun time.

So, if you start moderating, obviously SOME content will snake through that obviously shouldn't be there. And then the ISP would be shut down, for harboring images on their own server, and they "allowed" it to get there. Bye bye ISP.

Common Carrier is federally mandated, sure, but you get a LOT more leeway than if you started cherry-picking content.

LF